Treat others with basic decency. No personal attacks, shill accusations, hate-speech, flaming, baiting, trolling, witch-hunting, or unsubstantiated accusations. Threats of violence will result in a ban. More Info.

Do not post users' personal information.

Users who violate this rule will be banned on sight. Witch-hunting and giving out private personal details of other people can result in unexpected and potentially serious consequences for the individual targeted. More Info.

Vote based on quality, not opinion.

Political discussion requires varied opinions. Well written and interesting content can be worthwhile, even if you disagree with it. Downvote only if you think a comment/post does not contribute to the thread it is posted in or if it is off-topic in /r/politics. More Info.

Do not manipulate comments and posts via group voting.

Manipulating comments and posts via group voting is against reddit TOS. More Info.

Your headline must be comprised only of the exact copied and pasted headline of the article. More Info.

Submissions must be an original source.

An article must contain significant analysis and original content--not just a few links of text among chunks of copy and pasted material. Content is considered rehosted when a publication takes the majority of their content from another website and reposts it in order to get the traffic and collect ad revenue. More Info.

Articles must be written in English

An article must be primarily written in English for us to be able to moderate it and enforce our rules in a fair and unbiased manner. More Info.

Spam is bad!

If 33% or more of your submissions are from a single website, you will be banned as a spammer. More Info.

The ALL CAPS and 'Breaking' rule is applied even when the actual title of the article is in all caps or contains the word 'Breaking'. This rule may be applied to other single word declarative and/or sensational expressions, such as 'EXCLUSIVE:' or 'HOT:'. More Info.

I watched the Jon Stewart video earlier from this thread and felt bad that people often call conservatives on the far right racist. Then I watched this video. They laughed at the hardly funny Sanford and Son joke yet cringed on the hilarious Mitt Romney multiple marriage joke. I am going to have to disagree with Jon Stewart on this one. The proof is in the pudding.

WRT the Sanford and Son joke, I have to say I could easily see that used as is by the Left or Obama himself. President is a tough job and takes it's physical toll on it's office holders - Obama being no exception. Showing "Obama" appearing as a bent, 70+-year old after one term has some humor.

That's how my British professor put it as well. He'd also say "What's good for the goose is good for the sauce." These presumably original idioms seem much more concerned with eating than their bastardized American counterparts.

1- The definitely didn't pay him to get up on stage and rip into the GOP, so you can't blame them for wanting him off stage

2- They are "sore sports" who can't take a joke and laugh at themselves

If there was a contract that was signed by Reggie Brown that clearly outlined the types of jokes he would be telling as "pro GOP" you can't fault them for pulling him, but I doubt any such contract exists.

Most comedy is about surprising the brain, making your line of thought follow one path, then hit you with a slightly different version of reality for the punchline. To the right-wing mind, having to deal with multiple lines of of thought, some of which may contradict "the way of the truth", is hard, and hurts a lot. To us it may be comedy, but to them it is like telling them they are wrong to their face.

Maybe it is one of the studies about how conservatives believe Stephen Colbert shares his on-air character's beliefs. They know his show is comedy, but they believe he is "only pretending to be joking." He is a super secret, super serious sleeper-agent.

There is a similar article that shows how fear can cause people to more readily agree with conservative sentiments. Look up "the ideological animal" on Psychology Today. I would link it, but I'm on my phone.

I suffer from an extreme issue with ambiguity, if you ever have the displeasure of me answering a question I am extremely verbose to ensure that exactly what I mean is what you hear. When things are ambiguous to me, I tend to ask for further information otherwise brain goes insane trying to place the correct answer.

However, when I KNOW humor is involved, I don't suffer any such issue.

As a person looking in, I feel that the black jokes make the whole country look small minded.

To think that these are the people who are meant to be the upstanding citizens of a country, whose intentions are to engage in the running of the country. Yet they are so easily amused by jokes which are entirely reliant on a person's skin colour. The dichotomy boggles my mind.

It reminds me of the practice of showing propaganda videos to troops to help build their morale. (Various footage of their opponents fumbling, etc.)

I loved this, but to add to my point - the USA is home to some of the most cultivated intellectuals that this world has, and yet it's worrying to see these other kind of people asking permission to run the country.

I guess the smart ones are too busy making world-level advancements to bother with the running of just one country.

Wow, I had no idea he was on CNN before FOX. I went to Youtube and found this. He had me tricked into thinking he was a rational person until about the 2 minute mark where it starts to get all too familiar. I stopped watching there.

you didn't hear? Their new party line is "kill the all the niggers and poor people". Its funny the black people know that is a bad party line and vote democrat, but the poor people seem to think its a great idea.

that doesn't follow logically because there are tons of rich people who vote left because they're progressives and rich people who vote right for pseudomoral family values shit and everything in between, not because they're following whatever globalist rich people conspiracy you and the rest of r/politics front page these days thinks they are

I'm not sure what point you think you're making, but I don't think logic works the way you think it does.

In fact, you just seem to be offering more evidence that members of a class of people can vote against their self interest.

(Although you could argue that it is in the long-term interests of rich people to help poorer people for 2 reasons:

1) it keeps social mobility going, so smarter people can rise to the top because they have been given the education and opportunities they need, which means that we all live in a better run, better informed, happier and more hopeful society

AND

2) Because it's better to be a millionaire and alive, than a billionaire and dead because somebody beat you to death with a foreclosure statement.)

i don't see how voting left would be against a millionaire's self interest. i am a millionaire and i vote left. i have multiple friends who are millionaire's who vote left. i also know an heir of a double digit billion fortune who votes left. by left i mean, whatever is leftest on the ticket, our actual views go further left than what you find in american politics. the point i was trying to make is that rich people are not a class of people as you and so many others in this subreddit see them. we don't all gather in secret meetings every week and plot how to fuck people over and steal all the money. the people i know who are rich got there with hard work (well except the heir obviously) and it's offensive to me to be villified in every single one of these sensational frontpage r/politics posts. usually the top comment has something about an uprising of poor people and burning all the rich people at the stake or something of that sort. this place honestly is a giant joke, there was a thread in askreddit the other day about how this place is composed entirely of entitled pseudosocialist 19 year olds who have no idea what the real world is like and live inside this fantasy of an idealist utopia for america.

The pitchfork-wielding against the rich, as far as I understand, applies to the assholes who do so at the expense of everyone and everything else; namely Wall Street guys, corrupt bankers, corrupt corporate chiefs, and corrupt politicians. The millionaires-next-door are not on the poop list (unless they're just haters) because it is understood that hard work in the right areas gets you where you want to be.

I have respect because I believe that the kind of work I want to be doing will never yield the kind of money that would get me there.

This is totally ridiculous to be honest. The sooner we get out of this nonsense, the sooner we might actually be able to construct a way forward. I guess it feels good at least. You can simultaneously support the poor while suggesting they are quixotic morons or something. That will win them over.

Personally, I think that most of them are unconsciously racist. A good example is Bill O'Reilly when he made those comments about going to dinner with Sharpton. He said he was shocked to not see someone yelling, "Mother fucker, get me some lemonade."

His unconscious prejudice makes him think that blacks in Harlem act that way. I think many (not all, so people don't crawl up my ass by saying this) of white conservatives are unconsciously racist towards non-whites.

Personally, I laughed at all the jokes. I laughed the hardest at how the conservatives in the audience felt like making jokes about Romney and Pawlenty was in poor taste.

I thought the joke about Romney having a second lady and a third lady was pretty funny.

Also, I had to go check wikipedia to see how many wives he has, turns out it's only one.

I also saw that he was an avid supporter of the Vietnam War, and to show his support he got two student draft deferments, and he got a ministerial deferment by going to France as a missionary, where he got into arguments with French people about how awesome and cool the Vietnam War was.

Oh, and he complained that he had trouble converting them to his cult because the French are mostly a bunch of drunks and dirty hippies.

You know its a bad sign when the impersonater that you hired as the opposition in a staged debate still beats you and makes you look bad. Id like to see the GOP try to pull the real Obama off-stage when he's beating them.

I thought this Obama guy does a very good job despite not looking like Obama. The voice is spot on without too much exaggeration. This clip seriously sounded like Obama when he was doing the Correspondents Dinner.

I loved the Bush guy, but he was much more of a caricature of Bush than a direct impersonation. That guy was able to look almost exactly like Bush though.

I don't know if it's just the video or what, but this guy sounds like he's been drinking some Gollum Juice or something. He barely sounds anything like Obama and it sounded like he was this close to saying "what's taters, precious?"

Not even sure why he brought up the Black jokes. It'd be different if he was talking about Al Sharpton, but Obama doesn't even bring up race unless he's filling in his census and the media creates a story about it. It seems like the jokes were to just make fun of Obama's Blackness in general.

Hat-tip to EatMyNutella for posting about the Obama Impersonator, Reggie Brown, who was hired by the GOP to speak at a gathering and who was also hired by Fox News to "debate" a republican. (Talk about a straw man argument!)